Intel reports on postings face scrutiny

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday questioned the legal status of intelligence reports used in the selection of government officials for postings as trade and counsellor officers at Pakistani missions abroad.

A division bench comprising Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro and Justice Umair Majid Malik heard the federal government's intra-court appeal against a single-bench judgment in favour of officials who had challenged their rejection on security clearance grounds.

During the hearing, Justice Soomro questioned whether intelligence reports could be examined in a judicial order.

Additional Attorney General (AAG) Rashid Hafeez submitted that such appointments were at the discretion of the prime minister and the government.

Justice Soomro questioned whether the court could not intervene where the constitutional distribution of powers was concerned. He also asked whether an officer who was not cleared for posting abroad could be considered fit to serve in Pakistan.

The AAG argued that security clearance was mandatory for government officials being posted abroad. He said the officials were currently serving in Pakistan, but their posting abroad involved a security clearance issue.

He submitted that if an official committed an act within Pakistan, it would have an individual impact, whereas any act committed abroad could have implications for the entire country. He maintained that the petitions filed by the officials were not maintainable before the high court.

Representing the affected officials, Advocate Saad Butt argued that the candidates had been shortlisted after tests and interviews by a high-level grade-22 committee. He said they were subsequently trained and even issued diplomatic passports before being rejected on the basis of intelligence reports.

He said the affected officials were senior civil servants holding important positions, had good ACRs and had received awards, adding that there were no allegations, corruption cases or inquiries pending against them.

The AAG argued that service matters of the officials fell under Section 10 of the Civil Servants Act and could be taken before the service tribunal and other relevant forums. He contended that writ petitions in such matters were not maintainable before the high court.

He reiterated that security clearance was necessary for officials being posted abroad.

The court directed counsel for the other affected officials to present their arguments at the next hearing and also said the AAG would be heard.

The case was subsequently adjourned.